Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Transilvania

[1] 2 ... 9
Interzone / Re: The problem with rationalism
« on: April 24, 2014, 08:12:36 PM »
It seems even more primordial however.

If you ___ it at all, you lose the ghost. When you just stop, you realize you are it.*

And DMBM, what you say in the above quote reminds me of Quine's "indeterminacy of translation"- though I doubt you believe in quite the same thing that he has in mind.

Edit*: Of course, some people will misinterpret this quote and adduce the 'ego' instead of 'that art thou'

Interzone / Re: The problem with rationalism
« on: April 24, 2014, 06:48:37 PM »
Could the preferred middle ground perhaps be that empirical data forces a recalibration of phenomena within the same 'game' that empiricism functions 'within'? Perhaps this solution 'solves nothing' and in that case ok.

Also, when people say 'empiricism' versus 'rationalism' I tend to think of two vying positions towards reality rather than the expression of reality itself. The difficulty is that reality reveals itself through both (in an inadvertent way). I guess my definition of empiricism is this 'a position towards the world not sourced in the world, though the results it accumulates are' which is why it is not ideal. Though please inform me if my reasoning is unsound.

Interzone / Re: The problem with rationalism
« on: April 24, 2014, 12:36:46 PM »
This reminds me of the MBTI function "Ti" which conceives of things in first principles according to how they fit into a logical scheme. Introverted Thinking refers to a self-referential and internally coherent set of norms, more than a little traumatized when it has its windows broken in by reality.

Rationalism should not be a philosophical movement, but rather known for its value in dissecting the 'nexuses' we perceive in life. Then comes the problem of the tail wagging the dog, which is what many of the issues related to this one entail.

Though with regards to "self-bias equals reality-bias", do we really *believe* this- or is the tacit acceptance of it the "Veil of Maya"?

Also, with regards to speeches... The same genealogy of manipulation is to be found in the most basic sloganeering and buzz-word behaviorals. By making the info as bite size as possible, it exacts the most potent result based on the shortest vocabulary expenditure. This is part and parcel of Civilizational decline as well.

Interzone / Re: Should this forum sticky a list of essential reads?
« on: April 24, 2014, 12:31:45 PM »
After further thought:

Having a "recommended book list" is so 1995.

Instead, how about a list of the best books on every topic?

I suggest we derive inspiration from this:



A novel idea. We could also have typically Anal descriptors for each section header... E.G. "Art rhymes with Fart!" for the uninitiated.

Most importantly is that this is a more accessible format, a desirable trait for newcomers. Bite size bite size. Though if you do this, append the following message: "Reality doesn't come in bite-sizes, take it like a man!" and conceive of a *R33l Sodom1zers* list following the Demilich anagram format for each book title.

Interzone / Re: Should this forum sticky a list of essential reads?
« on: April 23, 2014, 01:23:39 PM »
Talk about a lack of initiative on my part. Sorry bout that.

Interzone / Should this forum sticky a list of essential reads?
« on: April 23, 2014, 08:56:18 AM »
I was wondering, for those who want to learn more about the ideology (for lack of a better word) this website 'officially' supports, should there be a reading list for those willing?

I know I saw a thread like this elsewhere, but why not sticky it on Interzone? Does the admin want to avoid cluttering the top of the feed or something? It seems like a good idea to me.

Interzone / Re: It could be worse.
« on: April 23, 2014, 08:54:19 AM »
It's funny how quick the knee-jerk is when somebody writes in that manner. When you violate the collective sacred cow, and fail to kowtow to a superfluous group standard, people all do a turn to the same omega-point and having found the strength, collectively, to oppose the individual who dares to raise their voice, throttle them.

Anybody with an ounce of self-respect would immediately notice how noxious this is. But the principle of 'vocal minorities' also comes into play. Sad.

And Crow, good of you to plead foolishness, for it makes them foolish by their own standard. Edifying

Maybe I'll start writing to fill the box. If I make 3 word posts, I'll just space out the letters to conform to the rectangle. And watch as hipsters catch on, and call this "meta-posting".

Interzone / Re: More on nihilism.
« on: April 22, 2014, 04:12:26 PM »
Nature doesn't bestow anything but nature. This is crap and circular phrasing, but I can't think of a better way to put it- Nature is not an entity separate from anything, it's the whole game, in and of itself. The only reason it 'exists' is because we can identify it. While we can certainly say things 'about' nature all the same, we ultimately cannot abstract ourselves from it nearly enough. This is why I like concepts such as Jung's Collective Unconscious. Sure, it doesn't REALLY get to the root, but the theory recognizes that it is there.

Though, perhaps, merely 'identifying' that it exists is not enough. Nietzsche immolated folks such as Schleiermacher and his cotton candy pantheistic entity (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schleiermacher/)- though the intuition of such a God was probably grounded in the same bottom line existent.

Perhaps the best we can do with regards to the 'essence' of nature is identify that it is main feature is consequence- this single notion doing more than all the syllogisms and a priori synthetic judgments we've ever postulated. Perhaps the best way to do this is just to live, ultimately.

Whatever, just my two cents. Also, DMBM, would you say that the former type of nihilist leads to confused doctrines, as it is intrinsically contradictory? That is, people who embrace it often unknowingly void the concept of nihilism (as they define it too) they claim to support?

Interzone / Re: Tell me about your education.
« on: April 20, 2014, 10:08:01 AM »
In most classes, indoctrination is present - not a centrally organized schema but usually following the personal beliefs of the instructors, which don't differ much. In a typical class, there are a few cheerleaders, a few malcontents, and everyone else just tries to stay awake. Very few students give a shit one way or the other, which is why the level of understanding is so shallow. Most passively accept what they're told because they don't care enough to disagree.

This too- this is probably the biggest manifestation of how shitty and unoptimized education is.

Interzone / Re: Tell me about your education.
« on: April 20, 2014, 08:30:28 AM »
The thing is, while school commits itself to some illusory Socratic method, it's actually GIVING YOU the conclusions you're meant to obtain, not the data that allows people to infer answers for themselves.

That's why, in my mind, classroom participation is best served with a dose of side reading on one's own. That gives you perspective (if you're in dire need of it).

The thing is, people already EXPECT a sort of answer to their expectations. They've confined the answer to their perception, and thus, the world is a bundle of answers waiting to be discovered- and these kids are remarkably mechanized.

EDIT: I am still an undergraduate in university.

Interzone / Re: Darkness
« on: April 18, 2014, 10:31:13 AM »
Polarity is the epitome of the process of life- this is the stability that grants existence as a altogether prior essential. This occurs when we avoid stacking 'good' and 'bad' on the world itself. This is "The Will to Power" and Heraclitus's notion of the world as strife.

Experience modulates us in and of itself- our interpretations remain interpretations, not the reality of those events which we instinctively adapt to merely by virtue having experienced them.

To immerse oneself in the rapids is what is 'dark'. The rapids do not fancy themselves dark.

Interzone / Re: The 'Domain' of Man
« on: April 16, 2014, 10:18:37 PM »
Anyone can tell how I feel about this thread from my posting history so I'll spare the repetition and say simply:

The "scholasticism" of art is unfortunate. While I enjoy the perspectives of others on it, nothing is more gay to me than a "black metal symposium." Could you imagine anything less black metal than a bunch of uptight dorks sitting in an air conditioned room (not even sipping brandy, fags) analyzing the Norwegian scene(because that's the only one that anyone seems to know/care about).

Ugh classical is even worse. If I see another non-german speaker use "fantastiche" to a Schubert song, I'm going to step on my own testicles.

As Goethe says, "One must BE something in order to DO something."

Unfortunately, these academics reveal exactly what they aren't... Their subject material. They just pick it apart, and enjoy it on the side. What kind of legalized dishonesty is this? Of course, I think we should welcome honest analysis- This website's existence and core beliefs/philosophies are a testament to this.

People rarely operate on a level relevant to life anymore. They just blithely dance around on a canvas- the art of a failed artist, painting poor souls meant to legitimize his failed work! This also sums up the postmodern ethos I would think.

Interzone / The 'Domain' of Man
« on: April 16, 2014, 08:50:20 PM »
There is a tendency to glorify unimportant things, else conflating the superficial aspects of a meaningful scenario with the afflatus. The domain of man is constrained to the definitions, referents, and bases for his self-sourced way of relating to life.

The problem here? The 'self-sourced' way of relating to life only developed in the aeons of history and academicization of time. To this day, the base of our thinking has been shaped according to the amount of dust accumulating on our holy books, whether they be Kant, The Bible, or otherwise.

We have accrued an exceptional amount of data- yet it testifies not to our knowledge, but our ignorance. The more relativised each successive collection of thinkers becomes, the further we drift from what made any of this possible in the first place- a connection to what made us human, and even further, animals, and even further, alive. Progress means moving away from something. Best we check what our wellspring is, before deciding to leave it.

We have walked a long road, a road which has become ever the more bright, clear, and easily traversed. Yet- this has only come at the cost of having a road to find. When you are smack dab in the middle of a cluttered undergrowth, any direction is 'the right way'.

The domain of man, has become removed from everything but itself. It is, autistic. 'Scholasticism' is not strong enough a word.


Interzone / Re: A helm unerring for the rule of life.
« on: April 16, 2014, 02:58:47 PM »
History shows again and again how nature points up the folly of men. Godzilla!

And one of the the greatest follies is that men perceive all their follies can be corrected with more of them. SUCCESS! DUNNOT GIB UP! TONY ROBBINS SAVIOUR SOUL

Interzone / Re: A helm unerring for the rule of life.
« on: April 16, 2014, 02:55:18 PM »
"The rediscovery of man's place" is how we might phrase the question today.

In the old days, there was no such question, as Crow has alluded to on another thread. They simply lived.

Because the will of the universe is unchanging, man's presumptions of progress blind him to the fact that nothing has changed, nor will ever change according to the parameters he's put up.

^This relates to what Sr. Aquiles is saying about curiosity. Since we've developed parameters for everything, that has become what is meaningful- whatever falls underneath the purview of these parameters. Curiosity is actually eternal, for it comes from something that is 'curiously' unchanging, the Rule of Life. Only modern man can admit curiosity is or can be extinguished.

[1] 2 ... 9